• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Recent content by Poor Debater

  1. Poor Debater

    Paleoclimate Cycles and Current Temperatures

    People who know how to read, think, and compute will realize that the fastest warming from these Milankovitch cycles has been 1.1° per century, as indicated by the author's Figure 6. People who know how to read, think, and compute know that the current warming is proceeding about 10 times faster...
  2. Poor Debater

    AGW: The best arguments a lay person can make!

    The hockey stick was a retrospective of the past, not a prediction of the future. Somebody was paid to lie to you about that, and you swallowed their lies hook, line, and sinker, just like the rube they took you for. Big Lie #2: nobody has ever said AGW stared in 1900. And you failed to cite a...
  3. Poor Debater

    Global warming: Fake news becomes no news

    Precisely the point. If they had used any resolution longer than 20 years, they would have been throwing away data. The 20-year timesteps are essentially required by the data they had. And they are of course correct that if you de-resolve the given dataset into, say 100-year steps, their...
  4. Poor Debater

    Global warming: Fake news becomes no news

    Oh, you found cooling in several global datasets? During the last half of the 20th century? Which ones, pray tell? We all want to know. But the graph you posted did show global warming in the late 20th century. So you don't even know what you posted. But the ice core data isn't global. It's...
  5. Poor Debater

    Climate Models for the Layman

    No I'm not. I'm taking the data from figure 1 that flogger deleted, and restoring it. And gullible Jack never once thinks to wonder ... why did flogger delete 2/3 of Figure 1? What was on Figure 1 that flogger didn't want gullible Jack to see?
  6. Poor Debater

    Climate Models for the Layman

    All I did was restore the Kobashi et al. data that you deleted. You were dishonest to delete it in the first place, as you yourself have conceded by your belated posting of the entire paper.
  7. Poor Debater

    Global warming: Fake news becomes no news

    Because that's the median of the individual proxies. The combined dataset, using all proxies, has a resolution of 20 years. Which you would have seen right away, if you had taken the trouble to look at it.
  8. Poor Debater

    Global warming: Fake news becomes no news

    It is. And every datapoint on it is correct, and properly sourced. Don't blame me if the scientific data utterly destroys your position.
  9. Poor Debater

    Climate Models for the Layman

    The deliberate deletion of 2/3 of it, in order to mislead your audience. You altered the graph by chopping off 2/3 of it, in order to deliberately mislead. That's despicable behavior. I restored one of the data points you deleted. That's honest behavior.
  10. Poor Debater

    Climate Models for the Layman

    It looks to me like flogger deleted the 170 year graph entirely, to mislead you, and everyone else, about the true extent of the data. But I'm not surprised to see that you're totally on board with deliberate misrepresentation of the scientific data. Jack.
  11. Poor Debater

    Global warming: Fake news becomes no news

    So now you don't want data, you want "facilities"? Down the hallway and to the right. Look for the "MEN" sign.
  12. Poor Debater

    Global warming: Fake news becomes no news

    I just did. Apparently you cannot read. Or do you imagine that the published dataset is not also part of the peer-reviewed paper, because it's in supplementary materials?
  13. Poor Debater

    Climate Models for the Layman

    You posted the peer-review in its entirety only after I pointed out your fraudulent use of Figure 1. And it's transparently obvious why in previous posts you deleted the data that refuted your political views. My restoration of your fraudulent deletions was an act of honesty. Your deletions...
  14. Poor Debater

    Global warming: Fake news becomes no news

    You seem to have lost your ability to read. Or your ability to understand what you read. Apparently you didn't even look at the graph you're complaining about. Where all sources are listed.
  15. Poor Debater

    Climate Models for the Layman

    Utterly false. Kobashi et al. published a graph with data. You deleted 2/3 of that graph, deliberately hiding that data from your audience in an attempt to deliberately mislead. Then, when I restored just one point of the data you fraudulently deleted, you're complaining that I'm being...
See more
Back
Top Bottom